Dr. Fridell:My company
provides training for law enforcement on the topic that people usually
associate with the phrases “racial profiling” or “bias policing.” Our
training is different from the traditional training on this topic, however;
we have incorporated the modern science of bias (especially the concept of
implicit bias) into the curricula. The implication of the science of
implicit bias for policing is as follows: even well intentioned officers,
with their hearts and minds in the right place, have implicit biases that
can impact perceptions and on behaviors.

CEOCFO: How has bias become a science?
What do you mean by the science of bias?

Dr. Fridell:Social
psychologists started studying bias and prejudice in the 1950s. During the
early years of study they only understood one form of bias; we now call it
“explicit bias.” An example of a person with explicit bias is a racist. This
person links groups to stereotypes. That “grouping” might be based on race,
gender, LGBTQ status and so forth. The stereotyping is based on animus and
hostility towards that group and those stereotypes can impact on that
person’s perceptions and behavior, producing discriminatory behavior. Key to
explicit bias is that it is conscious and deliberate; the person with
explicit bias knows it, owns it and might even tell you about it. As the
social psychologists continued their research, they discovered
(accidentally) another form of bias: implicit bias. With implicit bias we
still link groups to stereotypes, but it is not based on animus and
hostility towards those groups. The stereotypes can impact on our
perceptions and behaviors, producing discriminatory behavior. Implicit
biases are not conscious and deliberate. They can impact us outside of
conscious awareness, and the really bad news for your readers: even
well-intentioned people are impacted by implicit biases. That is, even
people who, at the conscious level, reject biases and stereotypes and
prejudice have implicit biases that can impact their perceptions and
behavior. This science changes the way we think about how bias might
manifest in any profession, including policing.

CEOCFO: Does everyone not recognize
that people have implicit bias?

Dr. Fridell:I think that is a
good question, Lynn. I think if I asked the average person, “Do you have
biases,” most people would say yes. If I then asked them to identify a
situation where biases impacted their behavior, many could not identify an
instance of their own biased behavior. Most people, I expect, understand the
abstract concept, but they have not necessarily assimilated it fully and
applied it to their own behavior. So I think it is true that most people,
even before taking our class, would recognize their potential for bias.
Indeed, it’s intuitive to most of us that we form impressions about people.
The science of implicit bias is very much linked to common concepts, such as
the “power of first impressions” and “judging a book by its cover.” In our
course, we go beyond a general acknowledgement of the existence of bias and
highlight for police the nature and pervasiveness of our human, implicit
biases and we talk very frankly about how those implicit biases could be
impacting their work. We address the consequences to them, to community
members, and to their department, and give them skills to reduce and manage
their biases.

CEOCFO: Are there certain areas where
police have more implicit bias? Would you give us a couple of scenarios
where it comes up most?

Dr. Fridell:Police are at
risk of biased decisions and behaviors wherever they have discretion. And
the situations at greatest risk for human biases are those that involve
ambiguity. For police, this might be an “ambiguous person,” that is, a
person they don’t know. This might involve an “ambiguous situation,” for
instance where it is not clear whether a person’s behavior is threatening or
not. Regarding the latter, picture a White woman, such as myself, turning
around quickly and reaching into the car to get my driver’s license and
registration upon police request. Would the average officer perceive a
threat? I think not. What if a young Black male does exactly the same thing?
Would the officer feel threatened? A trooper in South Carolina opened fire
on a young Black male who behaved as I described. Bias can impact police
whenever they have discretion and face ambiguous situations and people they
do not know.

CEOCFO: Statistically a young black
man reaching into something is more likely to be problematic a middle-aged
white woman. Where facts come into play?

Dr. Fridell:You raise a
critical point that is important to our training. In the training, we talk
about the various characteristics (stereotypes) that society links to
various groups, and that includes identifying the groups that society links
to street crime and threat. For instance, studies have confirmed that
people link males, Blacks, and Hispanics to crime and threat. A key
principle in our training is that stereotypes can be based in part on
fact. We do not beat around the bush; it is a fact that people of color
are disproportionately represented amongst people who commit street crime. I
am a criminologist and we have been studying who commits crime and why
for many years. In understanding this link between people of color and
crime, we do not find that race or ethnicity is the causal factor. It is not
because you are Black that you might be disproportionately represented; the
link is through income. Low income people are disproportionately represented
among people who commit street crimes. People of color are
disproportionately represented in low income levels, and that helps us to
understand what I said before: people of color are disproportionately
represented amongst people who commit street crime. It is the same for
males; it is the same for teenagers. After recognizing this important point,
however, we follow up with a big “but.” Yes, we can recognize that some of
our stereotypes are based in part on fact, but that does not justify
our treating an individual as if he or she fits the group stereotype. This
is where we go wrong.

Having said that,
Lynn, it is also important to recognize that there are legitimate uses of
demographics in policing and these “legitimate uses” are set forth in agency
policy. All agencies allow their officers to consider demographics as part
of their decision-making when demographics are part of a specific suspect
description. If the witness reports that the robber was a 6’, male,
Hispanic, in a white t-shirt and red shoes, the police can use “Hispanic”
and the other descriptors in their investigation. Some agency policies allow
for even broader uses of demographics in police work. The “broader use”
acknowledges that sometimes there is intelligence relevant to a defined
geographic area of a jurisdiction wherein a particular demographic group is
linked to a particular crime. For instance, police may have multiple sources
of information indicating that White, college-age youths come to a
particular 4-block area of the city to buy drugs. Some agencies have
policies that will allow their officers to use demographics, such as White
college-age youths, in their decision-making if those demographics are
linked to documented criminal patterns.

CEOCFO: What are you teaching
policemen? Are you teaching how to overcome in a stressful situation? How
does a policeman keep from reverting back to what was the past norm when
making that split second decision?

Dr. Fridell:These are good
questions. First of all, you asked, what are we teaching police? The
questions we ask and answer in this training are as follows: (a) what is
implicit bias, (b) how might it manifest in the police profession, (c) what
are the consequences of biased policing, and (d) what do you do about it
(“skills”). We have different training programs for different segments of
the agency: patrol officers, first-line supervisors, mid managers, command
level; we also have a train-the-trainer program. The skills units (“d”
above) vary across these different curricula. The patrol officers need
skills to reduce and manage their biases. The first-line supervisors need to
know all of that, plus how to “supervise to promote fair and impartial
policing.” As we go further up the ranks, including the command staff, we
are discussing in the sessions the higher-level agency processes that need
to support fair and impartial policing. The topics include recruitment &
hiring, agency culture, the leadership message, training, measurement,
accountability and so forth. Also at the highest levels, we recognize that
they are guiding and holding to account two groups: the well-intentioned
officers who have implicit biases and the individuals with explicit biases.

Second, let us go
back to your good question about stressful, split-second decisions. When I
think about law enforcement decisions and then law enforcement training in
bias, I actually have two categories of decisions. One category includes
those decisions where the officer has a moment to contemplate such as,
“Would I be requesting consent to search but for the fact that this person
is Hispanic?” That is a contemplative decision. The strength of our training
is for that category of decisions. The other category of decisions, as
referenced in your question, is comprised of those split-second decisions.
Often those occur in a use-of-force type of situation where the officer has
to decide (often very quickly), “Do I pull out my gun?” “Do I shoot?” and so
forth. That category of decisions requires a different type of training,
which is high quality use-of-force training. While we do not provide this
high-quality use-of-force training, we discuss in the command-level sessions
what the elements are. Specifically, we share the theoretical and empirical
support for particular elements of this training that can help to reduce
officer biases in those situations. It is all based on the science of
implicit bias.

CEOCFO: We hear about officers who are being less active in
the face of biased-policing criticisms. What do we do?

Dr. Fridell:Police and others
refer to this reduction in activity as “de-policing” and this can be a
negative outcome of the attention police are getting on the topic of biased
policing. Particularly in the months after the events in Ferguson, when
officers all across the nation were getting a lot of very negative
attention, officers felt besieged. They believed they were going to get hit
upside the head, no matter what they did, so some decided to “lay
low”–reducing their proactive policing. This is not what we want to happen,
but it is understandable. To prevent this, officers need to know that they
will have community support when they do the right thing, which is most of
the time. And we need strong police leaders who can convey empathy for what
their officers are feeling and experiencing, but lead them back to work.

CEOCFO: Do you find that the police
departments that are engaging with you tend to be ones that really need the
help or more so the more forward thinking ones that are probably doing
pretty well now, but want to make sure?

Dr. Fridell:The agencies that
need our help are those agencies that hire humans to do the work of
policing. That said, those agencies come to us in two ways. Some are
proactively seeking best practice in training on police bias. Their leaders
are going to conferences and reading police periodicals to find out how to
improve their agencies and they learn that implicit-bias-awareness training
is state of the art. And yes, Lynn, we find that these police leaders are
implementing a lot of other best practices within their agencies. They are
adopting de-escalation training, critical incident training (to deal more
effectively with people who have mental illness), they are implementing
progressive hiring practices. The second way agencies come to us is through
referrals, or sometimes directives, because they have experienced issues in
their jurisdictions linked to biased policing. We have received a number of
agency referrals from the U.S. Department of Justice (USDOJ). Some come to
us through the Civil Rights Division because they were facing a law suit
from that unit and decided to enter into a consent decree (instead of
litigating the law suit). Implementing implicit bias awareness training
might be a component of that decree. We also get referrals from the USDOJ
Office of Community Oriented Policing Services or “COPS Office.” They
provide services for agencies that “are teetering on the edge” of a civil
rights lawsuit, but they are not there yet. They receive support for
adopting reforms, including training in implicit bias awareness, to move
away from that ledge.

CEOCFO: What has changed in your approach
from when you first started and you first developed courses as you work with
more and more police on all the levels? What have you learned?

Dr. Fridell:The number one
thing we have to do in the classroom is reduce defensiveness. This is
probably cops least favorite topic! They would much rather go to Taser
training or even use-of-force de-escalation training than to a course
entitled “Fair and Impartial Policing.” Our audiences, Lynn, across the
nation are usually somewhere between defensive and outright hostile. So our
first challenge is to reduce that defensiveness. They are not going to
assimilate the material and/or adopt our “skills” unless we do this. I
partnered early on with a very creative curriculum designer and we work with
sworn officers to get this right. Some important messages are as follows.
“We are here to talk about the biases that all people have. This isn’t about
you being a police officer, this is about you being a human.” “We are here
to talk to you about how your mind can play tricks on you and, if you let
your biases impact you, you are going to be unsafe, ineffective, and
unjust.” You can see them perk up when they hear that this course is going
to make you safer; they perk up when you tell them this will make them more
effective.”

The
characteristics and quality of the FIP trainer in the front of the room is
also important for getting the trainees on board with the content. I am the
only non-sworn trainer on the team. All of my other trainers are either
current or retired sworn officers, because they provide the credibility that
I need in the front of the room. I only train at the command level;
therefore I am training either a room of command-level personnel, or my
favorite version is when my participants include both command-level
personnel and community stakeholders. These people will tolerate an
academic.

The training has
to provide a safe environment for self-reflection and engaging activities to
keep the attendees stimulated. We insist on small numbers in the classroom.
We insist on the tables in a U-shape so it’s easy to talk with each other
during the day, not just the instructor. We have role plays, small group
discussions, large group discussions and other types of exercises and
reflection opportunities. So they are actually “grappling” with the material
and not just listening to someone at the front of the room.

You asked what I
have learned and part of what I’ve learned personally is how to be a
business woman, although I still have a ways to go. I am a Criminology
professor who “accidentally” found myself running a business. Fortunately,
I’ve surrounded myself with smart and knowledgeable people who have helped
me learn and grow.

CEOCFO: Why should people pay attention to
Fair & Impartial Policing? Why is the company and the concept important?

Dr. Fridell:The social
psychologists introduced us to implicit bias and now a number of professions
are starting to train on this science. What is important about our program
is that we are bringing the science of implicit bias to the very important
and very powerful profession of law enforcement. In fact, when I rank
professions in terms of the potential consequences of their biased behavior,
law enforcement is certainly in the top tier. They can deprive you of your
liberty; they can take your life. We are proud to be the #1 provider of
implicit bias awareness training for law enforcement in North America.

We are now
exploring new markets—having identified an unmet need for this training in
other professional realms such as education and the corporate world. We seek
partners within these other realms so that we can team up to bring all that
we have learned to new audiences.

“What is important about our program is that we are bringing the science of
implicit bias to the very important and very powerful profession of law
enforcement. In fact, when I rank professions in terms of the potential
consequences of their biased behavior, law enforcement is certainly in the
top tier.”
- Dr. Lorie Fridell